Liberals stumping for tax cuts are as rare as three-dollar bills and hardcover digital books, and for good reason. Devoid of any other organizing principle, the only job of progressivism today is to grow government, and taxation is the blood stream of government. It is thus with the same healthy does of skepticism that we would greet a talking turtle that we should approach claims by the Obama White House that it really, really wants to cut taxes, dang it, but conservatives won’t let them.
The issue at hand is, obviously, the extension of the payroll tax holiday. The Obama Administration and the Democratic leadership in Congress—and all their attendant enablers in the media, the academy, the unions, etc—say they want to extend this tax cut one more year to give millions of Americans a break, but that Republicans on the Hill are blocking them to protect the rich.
As White House senior advisor David Plouffe told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Nov. 30, “we can cut taxes on 160 million Americans, 98% of the small business, and we can responsibly pay for that by asking 300,000 people who make over $1 million a year to pay their fair share.”
Or as the President—the supposed leader of all Americans—himself taunted his opponents yesterday, “What happened? Republicans said they’re the party of tax cuts. How is it they can break an oath when it comes to raising your taxes but not when it comes to wealthy people?”
So let’s be done with all this right away. Conservatives are for tax cuts—period. We believe Americans are currently overtaxed and that workers should be able to keep more of their money.
The Heritage Foundation believes that we should pass real comprehensive tax reform as called for in our plan, Saving the American Dream. Failing that, however, we support continuing relief on the American family. Congress should prevent a tax hike on employees next year by extending the payroll tax.
But let’s understand, too, that when it comes to jobs creation and economic stimulation, this tax cut is political gimmickry at its finest. Yes, it will leave more money in people’s pockets to extend the tax cut, which is always good, but no this is not a tax cut that will generate any jobs.
And President Obama may cynically believe that “paying” for the extension by raising taxes on productive people may make good politics—we don’t agree with him on that score, incidentally. This is blessedly not a country where people turn on each other—but we should all agree that if jobs creation is the goal, then making life hard on jobs creators make no sense.
And also that piece-meal one-year extensions do precious little to stimulate economic activity. Businesses don’t adjust long-term behavior because of a 12-month change.
So conservatives should not let themselves get flatfooted with in this tax cutting debate, and let preening liberals pretend they have suddenly seen the light on taxes. After all, if someone were to tell you that it’s raining soup, would you rush outside with a spoon?
Follow Mike Gonzalez on Twitter @Gundisalvus.
the president and missy pelosi should FORCE NOT on the people they serve, punishment for their blatant incompetence and the consequences of their unconstitutional acts! DISCIPLINE WITH ACCOUNTABILITY!
"ASK NOT what the government can do for you! TELL YOURSELF YOU can DO for YOURSELF! the less outside costs of missy pelosi, president government, the more personal freedom!
If the president is sincere in cutting taxes, the president and the government that works for him takes the CUT TO ALLOW THE CUTS! anything outside of this direct exchange is the dishonest way to increase more government revenue! Americans constantly suffer the costs of the consequences of the acts of the dereliction within control of the government! corrective actions including reductions to the costs of government are necessary!
Mike – this is a sad post, filled with partisan talk. Are you working for a think tank or for the Republicans directly or for the Drudge report?
"So let’s be done with all this right away. Conservatives are for tax cuts—period. We believe Americans are currently overtaxed and that workers should be able to keep more of their money."
You believe Americans are currently overtaxed? That's odd when you consider the fact, yes FACT, that Americans have never had lower taxes….ever. Taxes are lower now than under Reagan – so are you suggesting Reagan was a high taxer?
Heritage is growing more pathetic with its biased nonsense.
> "That's odd when you consider the fact, yes FACT, that Americans have never had lower taxes….ever."
Fact? No, the federal tax rate for the top income tax bracket is currently 35%. In 1988 it was 28% and in 1991 it was 31%. From 1913 through 1940, the income tax for the lowest bracket ranged from 1% to 4%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Income_tax#Hist…
@ Steve H, even if your "fact" is true this is the lowest Amercians have been ever been taxed doesn't mean that we are not overtaxed. We didn't get into this mess because we were not taxed enough. When are you liberals going to get it through your head that spending is the problem. Simple common sense which the Democratic party has none of.
as I was saying—– I don't think the higher wage earners would be to offset by paying a little more in taxes. I think that they could drink a more mid- priced wine once a week– rather than a 300.00 dollar bottle
For what reason would you want the "rich" to pay more taxes? What specific reason? And why do you want to collapse the businesses that employ people where the "rich"can afford their private market services? Why do you want government to control so much of a free society? Has government convinced you you deserve less?
The math doesn't add up… Obama says he'd be cutting taxes on 98% of small businessess… yet those small business owners are the ones that are 'making' around $1 million per year. Which is it? Taking from them, or giving back to them. It's all BS.
And just what is "fair share" anyway? When enough is taken away from them to bring them down to some median income?! Wouldn't it have been "fair" to inform people BEFORE they made their money that it would be taken from them? Maybe then they wouldn't have been so stupid as to work hard and actually earn their money (or make wise investments, which help the overall economy, by the way).
The author states "Yes, it will leave more money in people’s pockets to extend the tax cut, which is always good, but no this is not a tax cut that will generate any jobs."
But this is NOT true, as is explained in the author's use of White House senior advisor David Plouffe's words: “we can cut taxes on 160 million Americans, 98% of the small business, and we can responsibly pay for that by asking 300,000 people who make over $1 million a year to pay their fair share.”
It is a Tax Cut offset by a Tax Increase. Every dollar put into one person's pocket by the tax cut is a dollar taken out of another person's pocket by a tax increase. This is simply Income Redistribution.
The author states "Yes, it will leave more money in peoples pockets to extend the tax cut, which is always good, but no this is not a tax cut that will generate any jobs."
After Reagan lowered taxes, he reluctantly raised them, 8 times! Taxes HAVE been lower. George HW Bush, didn't get re-elected because of his pledge, "No New Taxes", that he was forced to break. Hmmm, taxes have been lower.
Short term tax breaks may be wonderful for families to keep more of the money that they've earned, but businesses don't make long term plans on short term gains. Businesses are looking for a longer term result, that is why businesses aren't hiring. They are saving money for future regulations and taxes.
The additional amount of regulations on businesses also impacts on how they function. Having additional expenses to ensure compliance with the additional regulations. If the regulations actually added something to a business, repealing it wouldn't make a business change how it works, but would result in a lower cost of doing business due to not having to pay compliance costs to regulators.
I feel that the higher income earners– could afford to pay a higher tax without upsetting their way of life. Even if it meant to order a more mid- range priced wine a dinner once a week ./ rather than a three hundred dollar bottle.
So we are to believe that because it is not a jobs creation effort, and it will put more money back into the pockets of those of us who do pay taxes, that we should be against it? Where the heck do you get your powers of reasoning? It is time to start raising some damn taxes on somebody. I am all for reducing the size of the government, but you guys have got to start compromising on something. Show us that you do care what happens to us!
Americans do not turn on each other? Tell that to the banks and investment brokers who made billions off this poor economy. As a registered republican I can tell you this; If you clowns do not start compromising on the tax cuts and tax the rich then you are going to hand our damn country over to the liberals! Wake up, pull your heads out of your rear ends and do what is right for the little people for a change!
The 'little people'? You're sure a Republican? Raising taxes is NOT the answer. Cutting spending is THE answer. We're headed right into the abyss that Europe is sliding into… Socialism destroys countries.
So we are to believe that because it is not a jobs creation effort, and it will put more money back into the pockets of those of us who do pay taxes, that we should be against it? Where the heck do you get your powers of reasoning? It is time to start raising some damn taxes on somebody. I am all for reducing the size of the government, but you guys have got to start compromising on something. Show us that you do care what happens to us!
If you believe the economists on TV, taking100% of the people's money that make 200K or more, would fund the gov't for some 6 months. If Pres Obama is reelected, he will tell his subjects that fact as a reason for raising all taxes as the tax and spend dems always do. The real question is whether the strategy is to hit 20T in debt and cause a failure of government or expect the subjects to demand that gov't do something to fix the problem – either way it becomes the end of America and the beginning of a newly fundamentally transformed America where all is controlled by the white house. Steve is letting his facts blind him to what is really the vision for America that the dems/progressives have in mind. Spending has to be drastically cut.
When will we all recognize everytime Obama opens his mouth he is lying! When will we recognize Obama, and his minions, will say or do anythng to get another 4 years in the White House. When will we recognize Obama is the most exceptional lair that was ever elected to public office. He has to be because if the American people learn the truth about who and what is Obama's agenda, he would be carried from the Oval Office on a rail.
As much as true conservatives would have never voted to implement SS way back when, they also realize that many seniors rely on it solely for their living and the rest of the country must be weaned off of it and the sooner the better. Despite the fact that it is in the red now and unfunded liablities increase by billions every year, per the trustees, extending or increasing the payroll tax cut will only accelerate this bleeding of the "trust fund".
Every time the GOP even broaches the subject of reforming and strengthening SS, the Democrats cry foul, yet we are now witnessing the Democrats cry foul as they seek to weaken it and the GOP seeks to strengthen it.
That is the problem with entitlements besides their unconstitutionality. They are used not for the good of the country but as political weapons.
Very true, Mike. Unfortunately, too many people are not educated and are naive about what is going on in this country today.
The payroll yax cut will save about #15,000. for the average worker and over $3,000. plus. for the rich.
What figures are you using Russell? My tax cut was about $2,136 and I paid the max Fed OASDI/EE rate.
Tax cut: A permanent reduction in the amount of taxes levied for the general fund
Tax increase: A permanent increase in the amount of taxes levied for the general fund
Tax holiday: A temporary lowering of the rate of taxes levied for the Social Security trust fund – You get to spend today what you would have gotten to spend during your retirement years.
Cessation of Tax holiday: Reinstating the collection of taxes for the S. S. Trust fund – this is not a tax increase – You will get to spend this money in your retirement years as the program intended.
Lesson: no matter what the president calls it, the payroll tax reduction being bandied about, is your Social Security future being manipulated and his claim that the Republicans are in favor of a Tax Increase if they don't extend the Tax Holiday is, as is most of his rhetoric, an insult to your common sense.